Volume 21 Number 2 Article 5
12-26-2019
Strategy To Strengthen Cooperation Between The European Union Strategy To Strengthen Cooperation Between The European Union And The Mediterranean Countries Through The Union For
And The Mediterranean Countries Through The Union For Mediterranean (UfM)
Mediterranean (UfM)
Elistania Elistania
Department of International Relations, Universitas Budi Luhur, elistania@budiluhur.ac.id Farandy Nurmeiga
European Partnership Research Center, University of Indonesia, farandynm@gmail.com Agung Permadi
European Partnership Research Center, University of Indonesia, agungpermadi123@gmail.com
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/global
Part of the Defense and Security Studies Commons, International and Area Studies Commons, International Relations Commons, Law Commons, and the Political Theory Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Elistania, Elistania; Nurmeiga, Farandy; and Permadi, Agung (2019) "Strategy To Strengthen Cooperation Between The European Union And The Mediterranean Countries Through The Union For Mediterranean (UfM)," Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional: Vol. 21 : No. 2 , Article 5.
DOI: 10.7454/global.v21i2.398
Available at: https://scholarhub.ui.ac.id/global/vol21/iss2/5
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty of Social and Political Sciences at UI Scholars Hub. It has been accepted for inclusion in Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional by an authorized editor of UI Scholars Hub.
Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional Vol. 21 No. 2. Page 242-261. DOI: 10.7454/global.v21i2.398
© Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional 2019 E-ISSN: 2579-8251
242
STRATEGY TO STRENGTHEN COOPERATION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES THROUGH
THE UNION FOR MEDITERRANEAN (UFM)
Elistania
Department of International Relations Universitas Budi Luhur elistania@budiluhur.ac.id
Farandy Nurmeiga
European Partnership Research Center University of Indonesia
farandynm@gmail.com
Agung Permadi
European Partnership Research Center University of Indonesia
agungpermadi123@gmail.com
Abstrak
Uni Eropa merupakan salah satu contoh wadah kerja sama yang mewakili identitas regional. Di tengah proses integrasi dan perluasan keanggotaan, Uni Eropa memiliki kepentingan untuk membangun hubungan baik dengan negara-negara bukan anggota yang berada di kawasan terdekat, termasuk Mediterania. Proses pembentukan kerja sama antara Uni Eropa dengan negara-negara Mediterania terus mengalami pengubahan. Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) di tahun 1995 adalah wadah kerja sama regional dengan negara anggota paling banyak dan memiliki fondasi pilar kerja sama yang telah tersusun dengan baik. Namun, kedua entitas tersebut kembali membentuk wadah kerja sama yang baru yaitu The Union for Mediterranean (UfM) di tahun 2008. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan alasan Uni Eropa dan negara-negara Mediterania mengubah Euro- Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) menjadi The Union for The Mediterranean (UfM) pada tahun 2008. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan “theory building” dalam konsep regionalisme Alex Warleigh-Lack, temuan dalam penelitian menghasilkan jawaban bahwa EMP memiliki nilai-nilai negatif yang tidak sesuai dengan perkembangan isu sehingga menjadi alasan untuk dibentuknya UfM.
Kata kunci :
Uni Eropa, Mediterania, kerja sama, regionalisme, organisasi internasional
Abstract
The European Union is an example of regional cooperations that represents regional identity. In the midst of the process of integration and expansion of membership, the European Union has an interest in building good relations with non-member countries in the immediate region, including the Mediterranean. The process of establishing cooperation between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries continues to change. The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) in 1995 was the place for regional cooperation with most member countries and had a well-structured pillar of cooperation. However, the two entities re-formed a new cooperative platform, The Union for Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008. This study aims to explain why the European Union and Mediterranean countries changed the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) into The Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008. Using the theory building approach in the Alex Warleigh-Lack regionalism concept, the findings in the research resulted in an answer that EMP has negative values that are not in accordance with the development of the issue so that it becomes a reason for the formation of UfM.
Keywords :
European Union, Mediterranean, cooperation, regionalism, international organization
INTRODUCTION
After the end of World War II, the discussion of International Relations realm shifted from state and war to discussion that led more to cooperation between countries. We can see the shifting of these issues from the formation of various regional and international organizations. The European Union is a regional organization that began with the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 as a forum for cooperation in the control of trade in raw materials for weapons of war (steel and coal) carried out by Germany, Italy, France, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. After the formation of the ECSC, the process of European integration began to develop from economic integration into a political integration as a result of the enlargement of policies implemented by the European Union. The expansion of EU membership expanded to Central and Eastern European countries that had previously joined the Soviet Union federation. EU trying strengthen it’s position as a supranational institution by expanding integration to Central and Eastern European countries (Chandrawati, 2004).
In the midst of the expanding membership’s process, the European Union also focused on strengthening economic and political relations with countries in the region close to Europe, including Mediterranean countries (those in North Africa and the Middle East). Efforts to strengthen relations between European Union and Mediterranean countries are formed in cooperative schemes that often change following developments in issues such as The Global Mediterranean Policy in 1972, Renewed Mediterranean Policy (1990), and finally the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) in in 1995. The EMP is the largest cooperation forum established between the European Union and the Mediterranean with a total of 15 EU member states such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany, Italy, France, Denmark, Ireland, Britain, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Austria and Finland and 12 countries in North Africa and the Middle East such as Turkey, Israel, Palestine, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, Malta, Cyprus, Syria and Lebanon. The EMP was formed based on the Spanish initiative through the Barcelona declaration. EMP is seen as a forum for cooperation to strengthen security, stability and peace in the Mediterranean region (Pace, 2007). Charpentier (2016) find the strengthening of EU relations with countries near the European region seen as the European Union’s efforts to strengthen the process of integration in EU regionalism (Charpentier, 2016).
There have been high expectations of the EMP since its early formation. EMP is one of the most comprehensive foreign policies adopted by the European Union. EMP is
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
a representation that shows an ambition of a new multilateral cooperation approach for European and Mediterranean relations (Barbé and Surrallés 2010). However, the ambitious plan for the formation of political and security stability between the European Union and the Mediterranean have not been fully achieved following the real condition of the EMP formation, that condition prone to worsen relations between the two, especially on issues relating to Israeli political activities towards Arab countries (Youngs, 2017). The complexity of bilateral relations and sub-regional dynamics makes the EU need to revise the EMP, with the hope that the UFM can increase cooperation selectively and flexibly (Barbé and Surrallés, 2010).
In addition, a series of events that occurred at the beginning of the 21st century forced the European Union and the Mediterranean countries to rearranged the cooperation schemes that had been formed. The 9/11 tragedy and the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) campaign carried out by the US and NATO against Iraq and Afghanistan led to a skeptical outlook on EMP member countries from the Mediterranean sides against the European Union (Hierro, 2017). Based on a face-to-face interview results conducted by Gallup of 10,004 Muslims in 9 Muslim-majority countries (Indonesia, Turkey, Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon, Morocco, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan), only 12% considered the Western country had already respect Islamic values after 9/11 (Gallup, 2003).
In another side, the European Union also began to expand its membership by including Soviet fraction states in the European Union membership in 2004. The expansion of membership effected the European Union getting closer to areas that are not stable in terms of security and trigger human migration. Most countries integrated with European Union membership in 2004 were close to the Mediterranean Sea, its make that countries should be integrated with Europe (Bindi and Angelescu, 2012). Shared sovereignty as a process of cooperation in dealing with joint problems such as threats in the Mediterranean must continue to be carried out or changed even though in 2005 there was a failure of an agreement on the use of the European constitution which signaled an internal conflict in the European Union (Hutabarat, 2005). Some of these conditions forced the European Union to start designing new policy concepts to strengthen relations with their strategic partner countries in the Mediterranean, North Africa and the Middle East.
In 2007, French President Nicolas Sarkozy began voicing opinions to improve EMP cooperation that failed to have an impact on improvements in the welfare, political stability and security sectors (Pace, 2010). The process of improving the cooperation
scheme is carried out a year later in 2008, the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) was formed on July 13, 2008. UfM is a refinement of the EMP which is considered unable to withstand the development of global issues not only involving the state but also individual member states. In the declaration of its formation, UfM offers a different collaboration scheme with EMP that is more promoting dialogue between individuals in member countries to contribute to the development of global issues such as the crisis of extremism, terrorism, climate change, migration, energy, and food security (UfM, 2008). Projects such as expanding job opportunity and intercultural dialogue are considered more pragmatic to improve perceptions between the West and the Arabs rather than addressing major issues such as the Arab-Israeli conflict (Cameron, 2012). Moreover, after the death of Arafat in 2004, peace relations between Israel and Palestine were difficult to realize (Basyar, 2005). Thus, the formation of UfM will involve more important public roles from member countries to maintain relations between the two cultures (Western and Arabic).
The discussion of the formation of UfM conducted by the European Union with its partners in the Mediterranean has been observed in several studies conducted by scholars of International Relations. The literature review can be divided into two units of analysis, namely state and non-state. There are research that focuses on discussing the national interests of European Union member states such as France, Spain, Germany and Central Europe on the formation of UfM (Gillespie, 2011; Delgado, 2011; Schumacher, 2011). There are also other studies that continue to use the foreign policy perspective of EU member states but with the perspective of intercultural dialogue (De Perini, 2019).
From the non-state side, there is research that focuses on the development of the role of civil society organizations (CSOs) that also influence the change of cooperation schemes from EMP to UfM (Kourtikakis and Turkina, 2015). From the previous research review, the discussion is so rigid because it only depends on the unit of analysis. While this research will focus on the historical aspects of the formation of UfM by considering an analysis of events that are within the time frame of the transition from EMP to UfM.
The research question asked is "Why did the European Union and Mediterranean countries change the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) to The Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008?". This research will focus on regionalism approaches to explain the change from EMP to UfM conducted by member countries of the European Union and the Mediterranean. This study aims to explain why the European Union and Mediterranean countries changed the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) to The
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008. The author argues that converting EMP to UfM is a learning process of the European Union and countries The Mediterranean is heading for regionalization that is truly capable of integrating the interests of both parties.
The subsequent discussion process will sequentially discuss the use of theory building in the concept of regionalism as a framework for analysis in research, continuing with the discussion section which is divided into five stages of discussion, and ends in conclusion.
ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
This research will use Alex Warleigh-Lack's regionalism approach to help the writer to answers the research questions that have been raised. The Warleigh-Lack regionalism theory was chosen as a analytical framework to analysis the case with consideration of its assumptions which explained the two variables as forming theory building within the conceptual framework of regionalism. The first variable proposed by Warleigh-Lack is the dependent variable defined as regionalization. While the second variable is an independent variable which is divided into 4 sub-variables, namely genesis, functionality, socialization and impact. These two variables are used to explain the formation of regional cooperation between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries in the Euro- Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) (Warleigh-Lack, 2006).
Warleigh-Lack describes 2 variables as a way to form theory building within the conceptual framework of regionalism. The first variable is the dependent variable that is defined as Regionalization. Regionalization can be categorized into two-way and multi- way processes with variables that can be used at regional, national, local and individual levels. The next variable is the independent variable which is divided into 4 sub-variables, namely genesis, functionality, socialization and impact. The first independent variable is genesis. Genesis are the initial points about how the regionalization process is formed.
This variable is used to find out why and how a regionalization process began, why countries join in the process and continue to participate in it, and explore existential issues such as the purpose of the process and its internal identity. This variable can help to explore diversity in objectives and teleology (if any) in the process of contemporary regionalization. This variable can also help to develop a deeper understanding of the relationship between goals, membership, and identity in the regionalization process, and its formation.
The second independent variable is functionality. The functionality variable explains how the regionalization process works. This variable can explain various
questions related to determining various actors involved in regional policy or decision making, and dismantling their relative influence. Therefore, this variable tries to go beyond country-focused focus. This variable is used to understand how different types of regions operate, and to determine what can be generalized both in each type of region and throughout the entire typology.
The third variable is socialization. Socialization is ideas that are formed when the regionalization process runs. 'Socialization', the third independent variable, focuses on internal developments in the region, asking whether the latter, has an impact on the ideational and normative context of various components, both at the Elite and Mass level.
This variable makes it possible to establish a relationship between identity and legitimacy in various regional processes, and draw conclusions on several issues.
The fourth independent variable is impact. Impact is a regionalization effect that occurs in the countries involved. The last independent variable, 'Impact', focuses on the outcomes of an area, whether permanent or sustainable. The main focused here is on the external and internal impacts, with a focus on material rather than ideational issues. An understanding of this variable makes it possible to determine whether an individual region meets its objectives, and then generalizes to the other two regions of the same type and finally for all regions to determine whether certain regions are more effective than others in contemporary global political economy. These four sub-variables are used to analyze the cooperation between Europe and the Mediterranean.
RESEARCH METHOD
This research is guided by qualitative approach to analyze the reasons European Union and Mediterranean countries change the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) to The Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008. Secondary data are obtained from scientific journals, books and government or organization reports related to EMP and UfM. This study uses data collection techniques by narrowing the time space between 1995-2008.
Data analysis techniques is conducted by several stages (Creswell, 2018). First, collecting information from secondary data sources relevant to case studies for later analysis.
Second, find the meaning of information that has been obtained. Third, grouping the information that has been obtained and adjust it to the variables in the analytical framework. Fourth, explain again the information that has been obtained and match it with the research sub-chapter. Last, describe the relationship between the explanation of data findings with the variables in the analytical framework.
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
DISCUSSION
To analyze the change of EMP to UfM, the regionalism theory according to Warleigh- Lack is used. The four Warleigh-Lack independent variables can explain why the change occurred. In this chapter the discussion is divided into 5 (five) subsections. The five discussions below are an analysis of EU cooperation with the Mediterranean countries.
The independent variable proposed by Warleigh was used as an analytical model to answer the research questions raised. Then an analysis of the change from the Euro Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) to the Union for Mediterranean (UfM) was carried out in 2008.
Background Formation of Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP)
Since the collapse of communism in 1990, the European Union has made changes in its foreign policy. The ultimate goal of the European Union is not only to become regional power but also to overcome threats posed by security issues (Suel, 2008). During the Cold War, Euro-Mediterranean relations did not form because of the dynamics of a bipolar political system. European and Mediterranean countries entered into bilateral cooperation regulations until the mid-1970s. This cooperation was independent of Cold War politics.
In the early 1990s, relations with the Mediterranean began to be put on the European agenda.
The formation of EU cooperation with the Mediterranean countries begins with a few steps. The European Commission issued the Global Mediterranean Policy in 1972, providing a single framework and coordination for bilateral trade and cooperation agreements, followed by the Euro-Arab Dialogue in 1974 (Kahraman, 2005). In 1976, the European Commission entered into bilateral cooperation with three Maghreb countries those are Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia. In 1977 the European Commission also cooperated with four Masyreq countries including Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.
Trade agreements and direct assistance from the results of this cooperation bring the European Union to work more intensively with countries in the Mediterranean, to form the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP). The point of this cooperation was the Barcelona Process in 1995. The cooperation was intended to strengthen EU relations with the Mediterranean countries, which included a comprehensive partnership on strengthening political dialogue, economic and financial development cooperation, and emphasizing aspects social, cultural, and human (Patten, 2001). These three aspects are
key pillars in the Euro-Mediterranean partnership. The membership of the EMP is members of 15 European Union1 members and 12 Mediterranean countries2.
In June 1994, the European Council in Corfu asked the Council of Ministers and the European Commission to evaluate and strengthen the Global Mediterranean Policy.
The European Commission proposed a broader framework at the conference in Barcelona. Therefore, the Barcelona program is the culmination of all efforts and institutional interactions between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries.
At the Barcelona conference held on 27-28 November 1995, 15 European Union members and 12 Mediterranean countries gathered and declared the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP). The cooperation is intended to create stability, peace and prosperity for the Mediterranean region. This includes comprehensive partnerships regarding strengthening political dialogue, economic and financial development cooperation, and emphasizing social, cultural and human aspects (Patten, 2001). These three pillars are key aspects of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership.
However, after the EMP was formed international political conditions were uncertain, especially those concerning relations between the European Union and Mediterranean countries, North Africa and the Middle East which were dominated by the Muslim community. The terrorist attack or better known as 9/11 has an impact on relations between Europe and the Mediterranean. First, the countries of the South Mediterranean, North Africa and the Middle East who have joined the EMP began to have a bad perception of their relations with the European Union because the existence of EU member states cannot be separated from the power of the United States in conducting anti-terror campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan post 9/11. Second, the anti-terror campaign carried out by the NATO alliance has led to a wave of refugees from Iraq and Afghanistan heading to Europe through the Mediterranean Sea. From the EU side, their membership increased in 2004 after post-Soviet countries such as Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Slovenia joined, plus two countries in the Mediterranean Sea region, including Cyprus and Malta (Bindi and Angelescu, 2012).
These conditions require changes or revisions in strengthening cooperation between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries. In the end, the two entities agreed to form a new cooperation scheme, the Union for Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008.
The whole journey of the partnership process carried out by the European Union and the Mediterranean countries is a genesis in regionalization phase. Genesis are the initial points about how the regionalization process is formed. Genesis that occurred in
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
the cooperation between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries was the first time the cooperation was formed, that is during the Cold War. Cooperation between the two regions was intensified in 1970 by holding bilateral cooperation relations. In 1990, EU relations with the Mediterranean were put on the European agenda. In 1994, the European Council evaluated and intended to strengthen the Global Mediterranean Policy. The peak point is in 1995, when the conference in Barcelona produced the Euro- Mediterranean Partnership which was marked by the Barcelona Process. However, the conditions that formed the background for the establishment of the EMP in 1995 were different from when the UfM was formed in 2008. The formation of the EMP was purely a form of EU response to changes in the political map after the end of the Cold War.
However, after the EMP was formed, security issues after 9/11 gave rise to negative perspectives from the public of the Mediterranean countries which required a form of inter-cultural dialogue. Then there needs to redesign and strengthening the cooperation between the two entities that can be realized in UfM.
Purpose of Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP)
The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) is a part of regionalism that occurs not only between south-south or north-north. The cooperation between the two regions is an implementation of north-south regionalism. EMP implementation is realized through bilateral, multilateral and unilateral relations (intra-European Union) (Philippart, 2003).
On a bilateral scale, the EMP regulates relations between the European Union and the Mediterranean partner countries. EMP has three pillars which include comprehensive partnerships regarding strengthening political dialogue and security, economic and financial development cooperation, and emphasizing social, cultural, and human aspects.
The first pillar, political and security dialogue has a program to facilitate dialogue between Euro-Mediterranean partners on sensitive issues such as security and politics.
This dialogue is intended to share understanding and create areas of cooperation together (Ferrero-Waldner, 2010). The project on politics and security is divided into 3 sub- sections, namely "justice, freedom and security", "migration", and "training for diplomats".
The second pillar is cooperation in economic and financial development. This pillar has the most projects, covering various areas of cooperation to support the ultimate goal. The projects provide policy analyzes, support free trade between the European
Union and Mediterranean partner countries, support for inter-regional cooperation for infrastructure, policies on harmonization and convergence with EU standards.
The third pillar is cooperation in the social, cultural and humanitarian fields. This regional cooperation program works for the community, in the EMP scheme. Intended to build capacity and promote principles such as modernization, participation, equality, Human Rights, democracy and good governance. The third pillar also focuses on facilitating intercultural dialogue and bringing together stakeholders from the two regions.
These three pillars are effective enough to show that the European Union is an actor with normative powers that is present in the Mediterranean region. In addition, the three pillars are able to counteract the issues that developed after the formation of the EMP. However, the elites in the European Union feel the need for action that is not based on the issues that have occurred, but by strengthening cooperation through shared vision and project plans between the two entities to welcome the era of globalization (Guney, 2008). Thus, there is a slight modification of the EMP cooperation pillars that were changed in UfM. There are six priority cooperation projects agreed at UfM including air quality improvement in the Mediterranean, maritime and land routes, renewable energy, protection of civilians, higher education and research, and the Mediterranean Business Development Initiative (Hunt, 2011).
The change in the form of cooperation design proves that the European Union and the Mediterranean countries are so adaptive in establishing cooperation in the era of globalization. Functionality explains how the regionalization process works. The regionalization process in the EMP is listed in three pillars which include a comprehensive partnership on strengthening political dialogue, economic and financial development cooperation, and emphasizing social, cultural, and human aspects starting to be given a slight change in UfM which is more about strengthening the low political aspects.
Perception of European Union and Mediterranean
EMP is a collaboration carried out by the European Union together with countries in the Mediterranean. The collaboration is based on making political, economic and socio- cultural dialogue. The European Union views Mediterranean countries as partners in EMP cooperation. But not all of these perceptions are positive. EMP is considered slow in its development and is considered too complicated in its achievement strategy because it does not involve many public roles (Youngs, 2017). This is contrary to the work plan set
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
forth in the EMP to involve the public's role as a foreign political actor and its interests in Europe and countries in the Mediterranean.
After the decade since the EMP was declared in 1995, the Europe-Mediterranean partnership or the Barcelona Process has experienced a series of serious reform pressure.
Especially when in 2004 the European Union accepted Malta and Cyprus into EU membership compared to Turkey which had waited a long time to become a member of the European Union (Schumacher, 2011). This further sharpens the Mediterranean's view of Europe and their relationship with the Mediterranean. According to the European Commission, the policy is in line with the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), which is to expand Europe with its neighbors and strengthen stability, security and prosperity.
The Commission also stresses that ENP has a different relationship with the policies of the European Union with its neighbors. Although the European Union offers them the opportunity to participate in several EU activities through cooperation in the political, security, economic and cultural fields (Commission of the European Commissions, 2004).
Hizam Amirah Fernandez and Richard Youngs (2005) in their book "The Euro- Mediterranean Partnership: Assessing the First Decade" explains that to see how perceptions from these two regions can be seen from four European countries including France, Spain, Germany, and Italy and also two countries in the Mediterranean those are Jordan and Morocco. The six countries were chosen because they were seen as key issues in EMP cooperation. Historically, France saw the Mediterranean naturally as a national projection. There is rarely a coherent intrinsic approach. French policy regarding the Mediterranean only appears as the second best option. Spain, in this case, positioned itself to highlight the extent to which the project will continue to apply to the future, keeping in mind the EMP's initial goal to establish a common area for peace and prosperity in the region (Youngs and Fernandez, 2005).
Whereas Germany, broadly speaking, as in most other EU member states, still has slightly knowledge and interest of EMP in the region. That is due to the failure of the German political elite to explain the changes in the foreign policy agenda to the public, the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) which revived negative stereotypes towards the Mediterranean and Islamic regions. While Italy sees the Mediterranean as a relative foreign policy priority. Italy has its own concerns in its cooperation in the European Union and with the United States. Italy believes that regional dynamics in the Mediterranean should be more focused on working with future regional neighboring partners.
In the case of Jordan, the European Union has experienced a strategy imbalance and segmented more towards economic and financial cooperation than political objectives. This has an impact on Jordan's perspective on the Barcelona Process. Morocco faces some of the most challenging issues affecting the progress of the EMP, as well as political and socio-economic issues related to the EMP, such as the dynamics of reform, migration and security. The EMP initiative has been well received by Morocco, but also shows the broader concern seen in this country over the direction of European Union policy.
Perceptions of the seven countries that have been mentioned as explained by Hizam and Richard are part of Socialization. Socialization looks at how member countries view existing cooperation. EMP is considered slow in its development and is considered too complicated in its achievement strategy. Thus, the European Union has an interest in rearranging their strategy in equalizing the vision of their member countries in building relations with countries in the Mediterranean through the formation of the UfM.
Impact of Euro-Mediterranean Partnership
The most obvious impact with this EMP collaboration is from the economic sector. Not only opening new markets to Mediterranean countries, but also changing tariff and non- tariff barriers to trade, removing non-tariff barriers for new members, and keeping them available for EMP countries related to the European Union through free trade agreements ( FTA). As non-EU partner, the interests of countries in the Mediterranean are to maintain stability and trust in their countries. This trust can attract investment that can stimulate growth and increase employment opportunity. But in the EMP, the centrality of the European Union is too dominating that caused countries in the Mediterranean lack the benefits of Mediterranean cooperation with Europe.
Insufficient level of total capital accumulations is one of the main problems faced by the Mediterranean country. That accumulation arises caused by a high level of import protection, lack of diversification in exports, the dominance of uncompetitive state-owned companies and from the presence of rigidity in the labor market. Thus, the region needs more investment and access to funding to start more significant structural reforms (Tovias and Ugur, 2004).
Cooperation of Mediterranean countries with the European Union, has an impact on market segmentation, especially for the Mediterranean. Domestic market of Mediterranean countries developed into a free market as an impact of joining the EMP.
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
The consequences of opening this domestic market can cause serious difficulties for many Mediterranean countries. Without access to appropriate technology, people, capital and finance, it remains uncompetitive with EU industrial products. In the short term, this can lead to the elimination of small and medium scale businesses, with the consequent decline in employment. The formation of the Customs Union with Turkey illustrates this problem with nearly 20,000 small and medium-sized companies closed (Nienhaus, 1999).
The efficiency gains from the Free Trade Area (FTA) can also only be realized in the long run, while the short-term adjustment costs tend to be large. The economic impact of the adoption of the FTA has made the unemployment rate even higher. Morocco suffered loss in tariff revenue to occur more than 6% of GDP at the end of the first 5-year period, and at the end of the full 12-year transition period it amounted to more than 3%
of GDP: for Tunisia the equivalent value is 6% of GDP. Likewise with 30-40% of companies in Morocco declared bankrupt (Morin, 2005). Tovias (2002) also argues that when the European Union targeting the east countries for products currently originating in the Mediterranean, the non-tariff barriers to EU trade will more threatening than before.
This further deepens Arab suspicion of European neo-colonial intentions in the Euro-Med process (Tovias, 2001).
The European Union is not satisfied with the economic cooperation. Thus, the European Union took the initiative to improve the cooperation in UfM. In UfM, the process of strengthening economic cooperation begins with maintaining an EU international assistance scheme to support economic policy reforms with additional targets to reach the core of the problems that are accommodated in the six UfM cooperation projects (Hunt, 2011). UfM also opens the way for harmonization of regulations between the European Union and Mediterranean countries to facilitate the flow of investment between UfM member countries (Hunt, 2011).
The impact of EMP can be seen from how this collaboration impacts mainly on the economic sector. The cooperation of the Mediterranean with the European Union has changing its market segmentation to be an open market. However, changes in segmentation are not all positive impacts. Increasing levels of unemployment, use of technology, and human resource skills are a problem for the Mediterranean. This problem creates more visible gap between the Mediterranean and Europe. Thus, the best way between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries is to harmonize regulations to facilitate investment flow and choose the priority scale of cooperation listed in the six priority projects of UfM.
Analysis of Changes in The Euro Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) to Union for Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008
The European Council has traditionally had an important influence in directing the future of European and Mediterranean relations, not only for its political guidance but also for financial Euro-Mediterranean programs. With the transition from EMP to UfM, the Board continues its political guidance. UfM performs the function of realizing the relationship established by the European Council. As suggested by Bechev and Nicolaidis (2008) and Kausch and Youngs (2009), UfM was structured as a way to establish closer economic relations and security cooperation between the northern and southern Mediterranean coasts (Nicolaidi and Dimitri, 2005). UfM focus mainly in low politics rather than EMP which is more focused on security. UfM sectors are engaged in business development and employment, higher education and research, social and civil affairs, water environment and blue economy, transport and urban development, energy and climate action.
The regionalization process according to Warleigh-Lack can be categorized into four variables: genesis, function, socialization, and impact (Warleigh-Lack, 2006). As explained in the four sub-chapters above, EMP has a lot of negative points viewed from the four variables raised by Warleigh in theory building of how regionalization is formed.
Regionalism must transform into a new regionalism form if there are negative points of changes in a regional cooperation caused by all four variables. The change from EMP to UfM can be understood as the Conjoined Regionalization process (Warleigh-Lack, 2006).
Genesis in EMP has two negative points. First, the motive for the formation of the EMP was established right after the end of the Cold War. Political contemplation in 1995 was different from 2008 or when the UfM was formed, especially the addition of the number of European Union member states and the development of security issues after 9/11 which could no longer be handled by means of high politics but low politics. The variable function seen from the three EMP pillars in 1995 is irrelevant to the situation in 2008 when globalization began to expand and various elements of society or public need to be involved between EU member states and the Mediterranean. There is needs for cooperation projects that directly lead to the core causes of the problem. Therefore, in UfM, there is a strengthening of low politics sector.
The socialization that formed between the two entities in the EMP was also have shortcomings in the process of implementation that was too convoluted that there needed to be improvements accommodated in UfM. Impact in the formation of EMP itself has negative points. In 1995, the cooperation that took place between the European Union
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
and countries in the Mediterranean was more profitable for the European Union in the economic field. However, the European Union itself has the initiative to reducing economic inequality between EMP member countries. UfM is intended to reduce the gap between Europe and the Mediterranean through harmonization of regulations and the equality of project commitments to improve the economic sector.
Based on the historical point of view that occurred in the transition from EMP to UfM shows that the European Union and countries are quite adaptive in building cooperation in the midst of globalization. The background and motives for the establishment of the EMP are no longer relevant to the issues that developed after the formation of the EMP in 1995. The security issue of 9/11 which had an impact on the emergence of bad perceptions between EMP member countries from the European Union and the Mediterranean can no longer responds by the high politics policies. The most suitable policies are low politics form by involving various elements of society and targeting issues that are directly to the core of the problem in order to maintain that regionalization. These strengthening policies and strategies were accommodated in the formation of the Union for Mediterranean in 2008 as a revised form of the Euro- Mediterranean Partnership (EMP).
In the end, the formation of UfM was a platform for member countries to jointly take action in response to the development of global issues today. Through the cooperation roadmap agreed in 2017, UfM member countries agreed to strengthen their contribution in responding to global issues in the region such as the development of extremism, racism, terrorism, and human movement in the Mediterranean Sea (UfM, 2017). Efforts to strengthen cooperation can be carried out through strengthening intercultural dialogue to combating issues of extremism and racism.
UfM's commitment to continue developing low politics has been tested in issues that have developed after the formation of the organization. An example is the time of domino political transition in Arab countries or better known as Arab Sping which was driven through social media to subvert political power in Egypt and Tunisia in 2011 (Juned, Maliki, and Asrudin, 2015). UfM has a special duty to be a liaison between member countries, international aid agencies, and the private sector to maintained the program that increase the number of jobs, innovation, and economic growth even in political transition situation (European Commission, 2011). Likewise with the issue of increasing waves of refugees from the Mediterranean region towards Europe after the conflict that broke out in Syria. The refugees crisis could trigger the second phase of the
integration process between the European Union and neighboring regions such as Mediterranean countries. Previously, the European Union countries succeeded in carrying out the phase one integration process in equating the rules on governance of the wave of refugees which began in 2014 (Charpentier, 2016). The focus of UfM member countries are improving governance in human resource development programs and increasing the number of employment opportunity in Mediterranean member countries that can accommodate Syrian refugees and provide jobs for them without having to move further towards Europe to have better life (UfM, 2017). Compared to EMP which has ambitious projects with high politics method such as security cooperation in dealing with issues before the era of globalization, UfM itself has low politics methods such as economic welfare for individuals in UfM member countries in facing various issues for further era of globalization.
CONCLUSION
The discussion in International Relations has shifted from a discussion of the state and war to a discussion that is more directed towards cooperation between countries. The European Union is a forum for cooperation between countries that based on common European identity. The process of European Union integration began from economic integration to political integration. In the midst of the process of integration and expansion of membership, the European Union also has an interest in building good relations with countries in the Mediterranean Sea region, including North Africa and the Middle East.
Efforts to strengthen relations between European Union and Mediterranean countries are formed in cooperative schemes that often change following developments in issues such as The Global Mediterranean Policy in 1972, Renewed Mediterranean Policy (1990), and finally the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) in 1995. EMP is a forum for cooperation with the most members and concepts that have been clearly arranged through the pillars of cooperation. However, the European Union and Mediterranean countries agreed to revise the framework of cooperation to be changed to the Union for Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008.
Using the research question why did the European Union and Mediterranean countries change the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (EMP) to The Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) in 2008? the findings in this study indicate that the European Union and Mediterranean countries revised the cooperation from the EMP in 1995 to UfM in 2008 on the basis of a learning process of issues that are further increasing by the
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
process of globalization in order to maintain regionalization process. The learning process can be categorized into four stages according to Alex Warleigh-Lack, namely an understanding of genesis, functionality, socialization, and impact. Each of these variables has negative values which indicate that the EMP is not a perfect container of cooperation.
Therefor there needs to improves EMP that are facilitated in UfM in order to establish Conjoined Regionalization between the European Union and the Mediterranean countries.
This research is expected to increase the repertoire of knowledge and research on the study of regionalism and the study of European regions. Regionalism analysis is not only limited to one region, but also can analyze interactions between one region and another. In this study, discussing the interaction of EU supranational organizations in the European region with countries in the Mediterranean region. The new approach offered by Warleigh namely new regionalism is used as an analytical framework to build the analysis body. This new approach can be an option for analyzing the region, in addition to using regionalism and functionalism approaches in the study of International Relations.
The lesson to be learned from this research is that a cooperation scheme that is not going well, needs to be revised. There is dynamics in international politics. Every global collaboration needs to continue to harmonize with existing developments in order to remain sustainable.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barbé, Esther, and Anna Herranz Surrallés. 2010. “Dynamics of Convergence and Differentiation in Euro-Mediterranean Relations: Towards Flexible Region- Building or Fragmentation?” Mediterranean Politics 15 (2): 129–47.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2010.485032.
Basyar, Hamdan. 2005. “Hubungan Israel-Palestina Dan Masa Depan Perdamaian Timur Tengah Pasca-Yasser Arafat.” Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional 7 (2): 58–71.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7454/global.v7i2.239.
Bindi, Federiga, and Irina Angelescu. 2012. The Foreign Policy of the European Union:
Assessing Europe’s Role in the World. DC: Brookings Institution Press.
https://books.google.co.id/books?id=7cmkEOkkzfsC.
Cameron, Fraser. 2012. An Introduction to European Foreign Policy. NY: Taylor &
Francis. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=7VLFBQAAQBAJ.
Chandrawati, Nurani. 2004. “Tantangan Dalam Proses Perluasan Keanggotaan Uni Eropa Ke Negara-Negara Eropa Tengah Dan Timur 1992-2003.” Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional 6 (2): 65–86.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7454/global.v6i2.228.
Charpentier, Loic. 2016. “Refugees’ Crisis and European Union: A Mechanical Integrative Bargain.” Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional 18 (1): 34–50.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7454/global.v18i1.120.
Commision of the European Comunities. 2004. “The EU, the Mediterranean and the Middle East – A Longstanding Partnership.” 2004. http://europa.eu/rapid/press- release_MEMO-04-294_en.pdf.
Delgado, Mireia. 2011. “France and the Union for the Mediterranean: Individualism versus Co-Operation.” Mediterranean Politics 16 (1): 39–57.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2011.547376.
European Commission. 2011. “A Partnership For Democracy And Shared Prosperity
With The Southern Mediterranean.” Brussels.
https://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/pdf/policy/com_2011_200_en.pdf.
Ferrero-Waldner, Benita. 2010. “Euro-Mediterranean Partnership - The Regional Programme: An Overview of Programmes and Projects.” Brussels.
Gallup, George. 2003. The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 2002. G - Reference, Information and Interdisciplinary Subjects Series. Wilmington: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Incorporated. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=2DIs_ZhAoKUC.
Gillespie, Richard. 2011. “Adapting to French ‘Leadership’? Spain’s Role in the Union for the Mediterranean.” Mediterranean Politics 16 (1): 59–78.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2011.547379.
Guney, Nursin Atesoglu. 2008. “The Region-Building Practices of the EU in the Mediterranean: The EMP and ENP, What Is Next?” European Security 17 (1):
123–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662830802503789.
Hierro, Lara. 2017. “Integrationalism and Resilience: A Dynamic Systems Analysis of EU Regional Integration in the Mediterranean and North Africa.” Resilience 3293 (April): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/21693293.2017.1308634.
Hunt, Diana. 2011. “The UfM and Development Prospects in the Mediterranean: Making a Real Difference?” Mediterranean Politics 16 (1): 171–92.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2011.547409.
Elistania, Farandy Nurmeiga, Agung Permadi
Hutabarat, Leonard. 2005. “Kegagalan Referendum Konstitusi Eropa: ‘Quo Vadis’ Uni Eropa?” Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional 8 (1): 91–105.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7454/global.v8i1.246.
Juned, Mansur, Musa Maliki, and M Asrudin. 2015. “Kekuatan Politik Media Sosial: Uji Kasus Pada Revolusi Mesir 2011.” Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional 15 (1): 68–
83. https://doi.org/10.7454/global.v15i1.20.
Kourtikakis, Kostas, and Ekaterina Turkina. 2015. “Civil Society Organizations in European Union External Relations: A Study of Interorganizational Networks in the Eastern Partnership and the Mediterranean.” Journal of European Integration 37 (5): 587–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2015.1034275.
Morin, Olivier. 2005. “Le Partenariat euro-méditerranéen. A la recherche d’un nouveau
souffle.” Études 402 (2): 163–74.
https://www.cairn.info/load_pdf.php?ID_ARTICLE=ETU_022_0163.
Nicolaidi, Kalypso, and Nicolaidis Dimitri. 2005. “The EuroMed beyond Civilisational Paradigms.” Berkeley.
Nienhaus, V. 1999. “Promoting Development and Stability through a Euro- Mediterranean Free Trade Zone?” European Foreign Affairs Review 4 (January):
501–18.
Pace, Michelle. 2007. “The Construction of EU Normative Power*.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 45 (5): 1041–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468- 5965.2007.00759.x.
———. 2010. “The European Union, Security and the Southern Dimension.” European Security 19 (3): 431–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2010.534462.
Patten, Christopher. 2001. The Barcelona Process: The Europe-Mediterranean Partnership. Brussels: European Commission.
Perini, Pietro De. 2019. “The Changing Scope of Intercultural Dialogue in EU Mediterranean Policy.” Mediterranean Politics 00 (00): 1–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2019.1605757.
Philippart, Eric. 2003. “The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership: A Critical Evaluation of an Ambitious Scheme.” European Foreign Affairs Review 8: 201–20.
Schumacher, Tobias. 2011. “Germany and Central and Eastern European Countries:
Laggards or Veto-Players?” Mediterranean Politics 16 (1): 79–98.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13629395.2011.547382.
Suel, Ash. 2008. “From the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership to the Union for the Mediterranean.” Perception, 93–121.
Tovias, Alfred. 2001. “On the External Relations of the EU 21: The Case of the Mediterranean Periphery.” European Foreign Affairs Review 6.
Tovias, Alfred, and Mehmet Ugur. 2004. “Can the EU Anchor Policy Reform in Third Countries?: An Analysis of the Euro-Med Partnership.” European Union Politics 5 (4): 395–418. https://doi.org/doi:10.1177/1465116504047310.
UfM. 2008. “Draft Joint Declaration of the Paris Summit for the Mediterranean.” Paris.
https://ufmsecretariat.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/09/ufm_paris_declaration1.pdf.
———. 2017. “UfM Roadmap for Action.” Barcelona. https://ufmsecretariat.org/wp- content/uploads/2017/10/UfM-Roadmap-for-action-2017.pdf.
Warleigh-Lack, Alex. 2006. “Towards a Conceptual Framework for Regionalisation:
Bridging ‘new Regionalism’ and ‘Integration Theory.’” Review of International Political Economy 13 (5): 750–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290600950639.
Youngs, R. 2017. Twenty Years of Euro-Mediterranean Relations. Routledge Studies in Mediterranean Politics. NY: Taylor & Francis.
https://books.google.co.id/books?id=imFQDwAAQBAJ.
Youngs, R, and Hizam Amirah Fernandez. 2005. Ten Years of Barcelona Process.
Madrid: Instituto Elcano/Fride.
NOTES:
1 France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Austria, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Ireland.
2 12 Mediterranean partners, located in the eastern and southern Mediterranean namely Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia. (Maghreb): Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria. (Mashreq): Turkey, Cyprus and Malta; Libya is an observer (2004).
